Royal!Harry with an acronym

[psychic_serpent]

No: HPFGUIDX 57988

"Ersatz Harry" <ersatzharry at y...> wrote:
> As I've mentioned previously, I've been meaning to start canon 
> combing to see if I could find support for this notion of Harry 
> being some kind of hidden king within the wizarding world, 
> analogous to Aragorn in LOTR.  I'm being a bit loose when I 
> say "king"; maybe "chief wizard" would be closer to it, perhaps 
> the rightful heir of Merlin himself.

Although I rather like equating Harry with a king in some ways, I 
don't personally like being fixated on his lineage for this 
purpose.  He might very well be the Heir of Gryffindor, if we are to 
look at clues like the Potters living in Godric's Hollow and Harry 
pulling the sword of Gryffindor out of the Sorting Hat.  But 
Gryffindor wasn't a king, technically.  I prefer the idea of Harry 
being something like a common-born king, like the peasant boys in 
old myths and fairy-tales who had absolutely no aristicratic blood 
but through their bravery saved everyone and ended up being awarded 
with the throne because they earned it, not because of birth.

> 1. Harry pulls the sword from the Sorting Hat.  Very Arthurian.  Of
> course, Harry needs it to kill the basilisk rather than to give it 
> to his foster brother Sir Kay (that's what happened with the Sword 
> in the Stone), but it's not a big metaphorical jump to go from "a 
> true Gryffindor" to "the rightful king of England" or whatever the
> operative phrase was in the Arthur story.

It's possible that JKR did in fact want people to see this as a 
parallel.  Or one could look upon it as Gryffindor, from the 
grave, 'knighting' Harry with his sword, commissioning him to fight 
to defend the school against the basilisk.  It fits in again with 
the archetype of the commoner who becomes a knight and saves the 
kingdom, and is more consistent with JKR's overall message.

> Incidentally, King Arthur's parents also died when he was very 
> young, though he was, as far as I recall, not raised by a near 
> relative. 

Well, the hero being raised by foster-parents has been pointed out 
as a common theme by Joseph Campbell, Lord Raglan and others who 
have come up with hero-cycles.  It's generally regarded as being 
another womb-metaphor; after being born, the hero is withdrawn into 
another kind of womb, from which he must be reborn when he comes of 
age and begins his hero's quest.  (Heroes often go through many 
metaphorical deaths and rebirths.)  Harry, in fact, goes through a 
symbolic death and rebirth every time he goes back to the Dursleys 
and then returns to Hogwarts, in addition to things like going into 
the bowels of the castle to retrieve the Stone and entering the 
Chamber of Secrets.  I expect to see more of these symbolic 
death/rebirth things before the end of the series.

> Oh, yes, why did Griffindor need a sword anyway?  His wand might 
> have been more appropriate.  And why are there suits of armor in 
> the castle (unless I'm contaminated)?  Hard to imagine that a suit 
> of armor would do much good against most spells, though perhaps 
> against some.

The purpose of a sword is indeed unclear, unless Gryffindor created 
it himself and imbued it with a magic that would allow, say, a 
twelve-year-old boy to somehow kill a basilisk when he had always 
been rather small and weak.  Suits of armor are easy, OTOH.  We know 
that dragons' scales deflect spells.  Armor could be charmed to do 
the same thing, which would be very handy in battle.

> 2. We know that wizard knights and nobles have existed in the 
> past. Specifically, Nick is Sir Nicholas, and I'm assuming that 
> the Bloody Baron was a real baron.

There's no reason that some Muggle-born witches and wizards 
shouldn't apear in noble families.  As for the Baron, who was 
probably not Muggle-born (being the ghost of Slytherin House, after 
all) it is also easy to imagine a wizard being able to manipulate a 
Muggle monarch who would have to power to declare him a Baron or to 
give some other noble title.
 
> 4. When Binns discusses the historical background to the legend of 
> the CoS, he notes that wizards and witches at the time of the 
> Hogwarts founding were often persecuted and "feared by the common 
> people".  He does not say "feared by the Muggles", which leads me 
> to think that the ancient royals and nobles were quite familiar 
> with and comfortable with the wizarding world.   

I think you might be reading too much into the term 'common' here.  
I suspect that that is just another way Binns uses to refer to 
Muggles.  Muggles are, after all, the most common sort of people 
around, far more numerous than magical people.  I think that is the 
way he is using it in that passage.

> 5. Though Dumbledore theorizes that Harry's ability to speak
> Parseltongue comes from the first encounter with Voldemort, he does
> hedge a bit by saying something like "unless I am very much 
> mistaken".

As far as Dumbledore knows, it is genetic, and he doesn't tell Harry 
that either of his parents was a Parselmouth (although it doesn't 
seem that he knew about James being an Animagus, unless he's just 
really good at pretending he didn't know).  As a result, Dumbledore 
seems to think it most likely came from Harry's having been attacked 
by a Parselmouth (although he hedges by saying 'unless I am very 
much mistaken').  One must consider, however, that it is possible 
for Muggle-born witches and wizards to suddenly crop up in an old 
family, and when this does happen, it would seem that NONE of their 
magical abilities are inherited from their parents, so why should it 
be any less likely that one of these witches or wizards would have 
the ability to speak and understand Parseltongue?  You never know; 
Lily could be where Harry gets this.  (And remember--she has the 
green eyes, like Harry.)  

It could also be that being a Parselmouth isn't as rare as some 
people make it out to be; perhaps because of the stigma, it's 
usually been hidden.  Just as there may be even more Animagi than 
the Ministry registry suggests, there may also be many more 
Parselmouths than is generally known.  If you were likely to be 
suspected of being a dark wizard just because of having this 
ability, wouldn't you hide it too?

--Barb

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Psychic_Serpent
http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb